home
PA Poll: Clinton By 16; WV Poll: Clinton By 28 | 103 comments (103 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

So much for the speech (5.00 / 4) (#4)
by dianem on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:58:37 PM EST
As I've said before, it was a good speech. But a man who has defined his candidacy with "words", character, and spirituality is going to have a hard time dismissing the words of his long-term spiritual advisor as meaningless, given the context.

Yeah, too bad the poll doesn't reflect the speech (4.00 / 1) (#16)
by po on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:07:35 PM EST
it's results are for the period March 11 - March 16.  Oh well . . . we'll just have to wait until the next one to see if you're correct.  

[ Parent ]
Indeed (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:11:18 PM EST
It is not clear what effect the speech will have, positive or negative. It could have made things worse.

[ Parent ]
The speech WOULD have (5.00 / 1) (#95)
by mg7505 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 04:37:19 PM EST
made things worse if it were Clinton. Imagine if her pastor said such things and she responded with the exact same speech. The punditocracy would call it triangulating and arrogant. Why? Because giving a speech about race is not the same thing as answering voters' serious (rightly or not) questions about your pastor's ideology. That calls for a candid interview(s), not a speech on your own terms to insulate yourself from all race-related criticism. His speech just dug the trench deeper between Clinton/Obama supporters -- his loved it, while hers saw it quite differently. Woe to those stuck in the middle.

[ Parent ]
Mea culpa (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by dianem on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:16:50 PM EST
It never occurred to me that they would release week old data during a time when the numbers are changing daily. It's like handing out last year's newspaper to a class discussing current events.

[ Parent ]
Some numbers HAVE come out since speech (none / 0) (#45)
by diplomatic on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:27:42 PM EST
the effect has been zero or neglible at most. (so far)  This was reflected by both Rasmussen and Gallup who already commented on Tuesday night results after the speech and there was no immediate surge back to Obama.

There were some major flaws and red flags in the speech itself which may have cancelled any positive effect.  (e.g., grandmother, Ferraro, failure to disavow pastor, flip flop on being there in the church and hearing statements)

[ Parent ]

Gallup (none / 0) (#99)
by PennProgressive on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:50:43 PM EST
daily tracking  poll shows that Clinton is leading Obama 48-43. Yesterday it was 49-42. The sppech was meant for the national audience not just Pennsylvania, because I think that the Obama camp is already looking forward to November (after stopping  FL,MI revote, they must be feeling pretty good now).  A  few more days' tracking will be able to detect whether the  speech accomplished what senator Obama hoped for---to regain the  momentum. But in PA and KY, IN or  NC it may not have the desired  effect.    

[ Parent ]

PA Poll: Clinton By 16; WV Poll: Clinton By 28 | 103 comments (103 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft